Lord Falconer of Thoroton yesterday
published his latest draft Bill to have assisted suicide legalised in
the UK. His case might be summarised thus: 'I chaired a commission,
comprised of my euthanasia-lobby mates, which unsurprisingly concluded
that it was a frightfully good idea. I have, therefore, advised myself
to present a Bill to Parliament.'

What
has gone largely unremarked is that 'Right' Charlie Falconer has
publically and entirely misrepresented the medical profession on this
issue. He told The Times yesterday: 'The position of the British Medical
Association [on assisted suicide] was now neutral rather than opposed'.

The
truth? The BMA remains strongly opposed to the legalisation of any form
of voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide and even rejected a motion
aiming to push its position from 'opposed' to 'neutral' as recently as
last week at its annual meeting. What bit of this headline currently
running on the BMA's website does Falconer fail to understand: 'BMA
continues to oppose legalising assisted suicide'?

I
gather that Frances Gibb, The Times' legal editor and author of the
erroneous piece, apologised for the error and told flabbergasted doctors
that she had 'trusted Lord Falconer to know what he was talking about.'